DOCSLIB.ORG

Observation of the Early Parliamentary Elections in Serbia (16 March 2014)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Observation of the Early Parliamentary Elections in Serbia (16 March 2014) http://assembly.coe.int Doc. 13516 22 May 2014 Observation of the early parliamentary elections in Serbia (16 March 2014) Election observation report Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau Rapporteur: Mr Pedro AGRAMUNT, Spain, Group of the European People's Party Contents Page 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Legal framework ..................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Electoral administration, registration of the voters lists and candidates ................................................. 4 4. Election campaign and media environment ............................................................................................ 4 5. Election day ............................................................................................................................................ 6 6. Conclusions and recommendations........................................................................................................ 6 Appendix 1 – Composition of the ad hoc committee.................................................................................... 8 Appendix 2 – Programme of the election observation mission (14-17 March 2014) ................................... 9 Appendix 3 – Statement by the International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) ................................. 11 1. Introduction 1. The Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly, at its meeting on 27 January 2014, decided to observe the early parliamentary elections in Serbia, subject to the receipt of an invitation and confirmation of the date, and to constitute an ad hoc committee composed of 22 members and the two co-rapporteurs of the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee). The Bureau also authorised a pre-electoral mission. On 30 January, Mr Nebojša Stefanović, President of the National Assembly of Serbia, invited the Parliamentary Assembly to observe the early parliamentary elections. The Bureau of the Assembly, at its meeting on 31 January, approved the composition of the ad hoc committee (see Appendix 1) and appointed Mr Pedro Agramunt (Spain, EPP/CD) as Chairperson. 2. Under the terms of Article 15 of the co-operation agreement signed between the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) on 4 October 2004, “[w]hen the Bureau of the Assembly decides to observe an election in a country in which electoral legislation was previously examined by the Venice Commission, one of the rapporteurs of the Venice Commission on this issue may be invited to join the Assembly's election observation mission as legal adviser”. In accordance with this provision, the Bureau of the Assembly invited an expert from the Venice Commission to join the ad hoc committee as an advisor. 3. The pre-electoral delegation visited Serbia from 18 to 21 February 2014 to evaluate the state of preparations and the political climate in the run-up to the early parliamentary elections on 16 March 2014. The multiparty delegation was composed of Mr Pedro Agramunt (Spain, EPP/CD), Head of the Delegation, Mr Igor Ivanovski, (“the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, SOC), Ms Ingebjørg Amanda Godskesen (Norway, EDG) and Mr Grigore Petrenco (Republic of Moldova, UEL). Unfortunately, one of the members of the pre- electoral delegation and the two co-rapporteurs responsible for monitoring of Serbia were unable to take part in the visit. F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | [email protected] | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2733 Doc. 13516 Election observation report 4. During its visit to Serbia, the delegation met Prime Minister and Interior Minister Ivica Dačić, Nebojša Stefanović, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the Serbian delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Executive Director of the Council of the Republic’s Broadcasting Agency, the Deputy Head of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), the members of the Republic Electoral Commission (REC) and the leaders and representatives of the main parliamentary caucuses. Meetings were also organised with representatives of the diplomatic corps, of international organisations and missions and of civil society and the media. 5. During its two-day visit to Serbia, the pre-electoral delegation found that the preparations for the elections had been smooth, while noting that these early parliamentary elections, called less than two years after the previous ones, might have an impact on major democratisation reforms launched by the authorities. The delegation welcomed the publication of the first report of the Anti-Corruption Agency on the financing of the last election campaign, and encouraged the Agency to continue its work to improve the transparency of parties’ campaign funding and their accountability. The pre-electoral delegation also called on political parties and entities to refrain from misusing administrative resources. 6. The ad hoc committee operated in the framework of an International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) alongside the observation mission of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the limited election observation mission (LEOM) of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the OSCE (OSCE/ODIHR). 7. The ad hoc committee met in Belgrade from 14 to 17 March 2014. In particular, it met leaders and representatives of lists of entities and political parties contesting the election, the head of the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM and his assistants, a member of the Republic Electoral Commission, a member of the Anti-Corruption Agency as well as representatives of civil society and the media. The programme of the ad hoc committee’s meetings is set out in Appendix 2. The ad hoc committee wishes to thank the staff of the Council of Europe office in Belgrade, together with the limited election observation mission (OSCE/ODIHR) for their co-operation and assistance. 8. On the day of the ballot, the ad hoc committee split into 10 teams which observed the elections in Belgrade and its outskirts, as well as in the following regions and municipalities: Novi Sad, Voevodina, Pancevo, Smederevo, Obrenovac, Niš and Vranje. In all, the members of the ad hoc committee visited more than 121 polling stations on the day of the ballot. 9. The ad hoc committee concluded that the early parliamentary elections held in Serbia on 16 March 2014 offered voters a genuine choice, were conducted on a sound legal basis, and fundamental freedoms were respected throughout the campaign. Fighting corruption was one of the main issues of the election campaign and a major concern for citizens. The media environment was pluralistic, but lacked journalistic independence and transparency in media ownership. The statement published after the elections is reproduced in Appendix 3. 2. Legal framework 10. The conduct of the parliamentary elections is primarily regulated by the Law on the Election of Representatives that has been amended twice since the elections in 2009 and 2011. The legal framework for parliamentary elections also includes the Law on Political Parties, the Law on Financing Political Activities (LFPA) and the Broadcasting Law, and is supplemented by the regulations, decisions, and rules of procedure of the REC. 11. In March 2011, the Venice Commission adopted two Opinions on the Draft Law on “altering and amending the Law on election of Members of Parliament” of the Republic of Serbia and on the revised draft law on financing political activities of the Republic of Serbia (LFPA).1 A new Law on Financing Political Activities was adopted on 14 June 2011; it entered into force on 22 June 2011 and was first tested following the “all in one” elections of 6 May 2012 (presidential, parliamentary, local and regional Vojvodina elections). 12. The National Assembly of Serbia is composed of 250 members elected for four years in a single national constituency. Seats are allocated proportionally among the lists having gained at least 5% of the votes cast. The 5% rule does not apply to the parties of the national minorities. The introduction of a quota system in 2011 has improved the access of women to parliament. However, the leaders of the political parties still have some latitude, admittedly limited, after the change in the electoral legislation in 2011, as to their lists of candidates, 1. Documents CDL-AD(2011)005 and CDL-AD(2011)006. 2 Doc. 13516 Election observation report in so far as elected candidates can place their mandates at the disposal of their party. Moreover, a constitutional provision still allows an elected MP to “irrevocably put his/her mandate at the disposal of the respective political party”.2 13. In the parliamentary elections of 6 May 2012, the results were as follows: Serbian Progressive Party (Coalition “Serbia on the move”) – 73 seats; Democratic Party (Coalition “Choice for a better life”) – 67 seats; Liberal Democrat Party – 19 seats; Party of the Unified Regions of Serbia – 16 seats; the coalition of Socialist Party of Serbia, Party of United Pensioners of Serbia and United Serbia – 44 seats; Democratic Party of Serbia – 21 seats; Hungarian Coalition of Vojvodina – 5 seats; five seats were obtained by small national minorities parties’ lists. 14. According to the 2011 census, there are 20 national and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RESOLVING DISPUTES and BUILDING RELATIONS Challenges of Normalization Between Kosovo and Serbia
    Council CIG for Inclusive Governance RESOLVING DISPUTES AND BUILDING RELATIONS Challenges of Normalization between Kosovo and Serbia Contents 2 PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5 SUPPORTING THE BRUSSELS DIALOGUE 16 ESTABLISHING THE ASSOCIATION / COMMUNITY OF SERB-MAJORITY MUNICIPALITIES 24 KOSOVO’S NORTH INTEGRATION AND SERB POLITICAL PARTICIPATION 32 PARLIAMENTARY COOPERATION 39 COOPERATION ON EU INTEGRATION 41 PARTICIPANTS Albanian and Serbian translations of this publication are available on CIG’s website at cigonline.net. CIG Resolving Disputes anD BuilDing Relations Challenges of normalization between Kosovo and serbia Council for Inclusive Governance New York, 2015 PrefaCe anD AcknowleDgments Relations between Kosovo and Serbia are difficult. Since Kosovo’s declaration of independence in February 2008, all contacts between officials of Kosovo and Serbia ceased. Belgrade rejected any direct interaction with Pristina preferring to deal through the EU Rule of Law Mission and the UN Mission in Kosovo. However, encouraged by the EU and the US, senior officials of both governments met in March 2011 for direct talks in Brussels. These talks were followed in Brussels in October 2012 by a meeting between the prime ministers of Kosovo and Serbia. These EU-mediated dialogues resulted in a number of agreements between Serbia and Kosovo including the April 2013 Brussels Agreement. The Agreement’s main goal is to conclude the integration of the Serb-majority municipalities in Kosovo’s north into Kosovo’s system of laws and governance, including the establishment of the Association/Community of the Serb-Majority Municipalities in Kosovo. The sides also pledged not to block each other’s accession processes into the EU.
    [Show full text]
  • Marx's Confrontation with Utopia Darren Webb Department of Politics
    In Search of the Spirit of Revolution: Marx's Confrontation with Utopia Darren Webb Department of Politics Thesis presented to the University of Sheffield for the degree of PhD, June 1998 Summary This thesis offers a sympathetic interpretation of Marx' s confrontation with Utopia. It begins by suggesting that Marx condemned utopianism as a political process because it undermined the principles of popular self-emancipation and self-determination, principles deemed by Marx to be fundamental to the constitution of any truly working­ class movement. As a means of invoking the spirit of revolution, it was therefore silly, stale and reactionary. With regards to Marx's own 'utopia', the thesis argues that the categories which define it were nothing more than theoretical by-products of the models employed by Marx in order to supersede the need for utopianism. As such, Marx was an 'Accidental Utopian'. Two conclusions follow from this. The first is that Marx's entire project was driven by the anti-utopian imperative to invoke the spirit of revolution in a manner consistent with the principles of popular self-emancipation and self-determination. The second is that, in spite of his varied attempts to do so, Marx was unable to capture the spirit of revolution without descending into utopianism himself Such conclusions do not, however, justify the claim that utopianism has a necessary role to play in radical politics. For Marx's original critique of utopianism was accurate and his failure to develop a convincing alternative takes nothing away from this. The accuracy of Marx's original critique is discussed in relation to the arguments put forward by contemporary pro-utopians as well as those developed by William Morris, Ernst Bloch and Herbert Marcuse.
    [Show full text]
  • Serb Engagement in Kosovo's Politics
    Serb Engagement in Kosovo’s Politics Introduction The Council for Inclusive Governance (CIG) organized on June 24, 2014 in Belgrade a roundtable for representatives of Kosovo Serb parties, Serbian parties, Serbian government officials, and a number of Serb analysts. The objective of the roundtable was to address the role of the newly elected Kosovo Serbs in Kosovo’s central institutions and to explore ways the Serb representatives could help to overcome obstacles at the local level, particularly in the north. The roundtable is part of a project on the normalization of Kosovo-Serbia relations and the integration of Kosovo’s north. The project is funded by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Kosovo Serbs in the north took part in Kosovo’s parliamentary elections for the first time since Kosovo declared independence in 2008. Under the current legislative framework, Kosovo Serbs are guaranteed 10 seats in parliament and are entitled to lead two ministries, if Kosovo’s government has more than 12 ministries. The last government was working with 19 ministries. If the number is less than 12, the Kosovo Serbs are entitled to one ministerial position. The civic initiative Srpska Lista won nine of the 10 guaranteed seats in the June elections and includes also some members of the Independent Liberal Party, which was part of the government with three ministries in the last mandate. The remaining seat went to the Progressive Democratic Party. The Srpska Lista has the support of the Serbian government and is expected to act in close coordination with Belgrade. Some see this support as a contribution to better advance Kosovo Serb interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Macro Report Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 4: Macro Report September 10, 2012
    Comparative Study of Electoral Systems 1 Module 4: Macro Report Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 4: Macro Report September 10, 2012 Country: Serbia Date of Election: May 6, 2012 (Parliamentary and first round presidential); May 20, 2012 - second round presidential Prepared by: Bojan Todosijević Date of Preparation: 05. 08. 2013. NOTES TO COLLABORATORS: ° The information provided in this report contributes to an important part of the CSES project. The information may be filled out by yourself, or by an expert or experts of your choice. Your efforts in providing these data are greatly appreciated! Any supplementary documents that you can provide (e.g., electoral legislation, party manifestos, electoral commission reports, media reports) are also appreciated, and may be made available on the CSES website. ° Answers should be as of the date of the election being studied. ° Where brackets [ ] appear, collaborators should answer by placing an “X” within the appropriate bracket or brackets. For example: [X] ° If more space is needed to answer any question, please lengthen the document as necessary. Data Pertinent to the Election at which the Module was Administered 1a. Type of Election [ ] Parliamentary/Legislative [X] Parliamentary/Legislative and Presidential [ ] Presidential [ ] Other; please specify: __________ 1b. If the type of election in Question 1a included Parliamentary/Legislative, was the election for the Upper House, Lower House, or both? [ X] Upper House [ ] Lower House [ ] Both [ ] Other; please specify: __________ Comparative Study of Electoral Systems 2 Module 4: Macro Report 2a. What was the party of the president prior to the most recent election, regardless of whether the election was presidential? Democratic Party (Demokratska stranka, DS) 2b.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Revista “EXPERT ELECTORAL” – Nr. 1(13)/2016
    Nr. 1(13)/2016 ź Ana Maria PĂTRU – Mă simt responsabilă pentru fiecare alegător care nu se prezintă la vot ź Campania de informare a cetățenilor români din străinătate privind exercitarea dreptului de vot la alegerile parlamentare din anul 2016 Member of: ź Dan VLAICU – Training Electoral Stakeholders – The Need for a Specialized Electoral Experts’ Body: Romania’s Experience ź George Tee FORPOH, Olugbemiga Samuel AFOLABI – Trends and Pattern of Voting and Elections in Liberia ź Octavian Mircea CHESARU – Innovation Processes Undertaken by the Permanent Electoral Authority of Romania ź Denisa MARCU, Alina GHERGHE – Involving Citizens in Election Administration. The Romanian Electoral Experts’ Body Working Group on Elections ź Bogdan FĂRTUȘNIC – Procesele electorale organizate în România–interes și percepție–raport de cercetare Journal indexed in: ź Nicoleta GRIGORE, Octavian Mircea CHESARU – Procesul de instruire a operatorilor de calculator ai birourilor electorale ale secțiilor de votare din Municipiul București SUMAR Preşedintele Autorităţii Electorale Permanente Ana Maria PĂTRU: Mă simt responsabilă pentru fi ecare alegător care nu se prezintă la vot – interviu realizat de Politic Scan ............... 3 Campania de informare a cetăţenilor români din străinătate privind exercitarea dreptului de vot la alegerile parlamentare din anul 2016 .............................................................................. 7 Studii, analize, comentarii Dan VLAICU – Formarea persoanelor implicate în procesul electoral – Necesitatea existenţei
    [Show full text]
  • Liberal Parties in Europe and Human Rights Emphasis
    LIBERAL PARTIES IN EUROPE AND HUMAN RIGHTS EMPHASIS by ŞEYMA KOÇ Submitted to the Graduate School of Social Sciences in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Sabancı University August 2020 LIBERAL PARTIES IN EUROPE AND HUMAN RIGHTS EMPHASIS Approved by: Assoc. Prof Özge Kemahlıoğlu . (Thesis Supervisor) Prof. Ali Çarkoğlu . Asst. Prof. Mert Moral . Date of Approval: August 5, 2020 ŞEYMA KOÇ 2020 c All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT LIBERAL PARTIES IN EUROPE AND HUMAN RIGHTS EMPHASIS ŞEYMA KOÇ POLITICAL SCIENCE M.A. THESIS, AUGUST 2020 Thesis Supervisor: Assoc.Prof. Özge Kemahlıoğlu Keywords: Political Parties, Liberal Party Family, Human Rights Emphasis, Economic Conditions Liberal parties are mostly neglected by the literature on political parties despite their central role in establishing European liberal democracies. This thesis aims to contribute to the contemporary literature on liberal parties by examining 33 Eu- ropean democracies and covering a time period including observations of 75 years. The empirical analysis shows that liberal parties are distinguishable from the other party families on their emphasis on human rights and freedom. Then, this thesis investigates the impact of economic conditions on liberal parties’ relative emphasis on human rights and freedom. The findings illustrate that higher levels of unemploy- ment rate decrease liberal parties’ relative emphasis on human rights and freedom and increase their relative emphasis on economic issues. Its effect on the relative em- phasis on human rights and freedom issue and economic issues is substantive when the distributions of the dependent variables are considered. This finding may demon- strate the liberal parties’ responsiveness to changing needs of the electorate and a value change in politics too.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia in 2001 Under the Spotlight
    1 Human Rights in Transition – Serbia 2001 Introduction The situation of human rights in Serbia was largely influenced by the foregoing circumstances. Although the severe repression characteristic especially of the last two years of Milosevic’s rule was gone, there were no conditions in place for dealing with the problems accumulated during the previous decade. All the mechanisms necessary to ensure the exercise of human rights - from the judiciary to the police, remained unchanged. However, the major concern of citizens is the mere existential survival and personal security. Furthermore, the general atmosphere in the society was just as xenophobic and intolerant as before. The identity crisis of the Serb people and of all minorities living in Serbia continued. If anything, it deepened and the relationship between the state and its citizens became seriously jeopardized by the problem of Serbia’s undefined borders. The crisis was manifest with regard to certain minorities such as Vlachs who were believed to have been successfully assimilated. This false belief was partly due to the fact that neighbouring Romania had been in a far worse situation than Yugoslavia during the past fifty years. In considerably changed situation in Romania and Serbia Vlachs are now undergoing the process of self identification though still unclear whether they would choose to call themselves Vlachs or Romanians-Vlachs. Considering that the international factor has become the main generator of change in Serbia, the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia believes that an accurate picture of the situation in Serbia is absolutely necessary. It is essential to establish the differences between Belgrade and the rest of Serbia, taking into account its internal diversities.
    [Show full text]
  • SE Weekly Mar 14 20.Pdf
    Weekly Review // March 14 - 20 SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE Observatory The Southeastern Europe Intelligence Unit is formed by an ambitious group of young scientists which focuses on the political, economic, defense and security developments in the wider region of Southeastern Europe. Our main task is the “Southeastern Europe Observatory” to become a credible, detailed, objective and flexible “tool” of information and short analysis in the hands of the researcher and the professional who is interested in the current affairs of this sensitive and crucial part of the European continent. In each weekly review, you will find the most significant news of the previous week in the region. SPECIAL COUNTRY REPORT: Turkey Kurds clash with police at Newroz - a cultural or a political suppression? very year March 21, millions of Kurds across the world celebrate Newroz, which refers to the beginning of the New Year for the Kurdish people. Meaning ‘the new day’ in Kurdish language, Newroz represents the beginning of Spring and the starts of the New EYear. Members of the pro-Kurdish party BDP (Peace and Democracy Party) applied for permission to spread their fests to the days of 17-21 March as they have been doing in previous years. However, this year, the Ministry of the Interior denied permission for the earlier start of Newroz celebrations before the 21st, strictly prohibiting any activity on March 18. The ban arrived soon after the president of the BDP, Selahattin Demirtas declared the official celebrations shall take place on Sunday the 18th, instead of Monday 21st. Despite the bans, Newroz celebrations took place in Van, Hakkari, Siirt, Mus, Diyarbakır, Instabul and Ankara.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeastern Europe
    U.S. ONLINE TRAINING FOR OSCE, INCLUDING REACT Module 5. Southeastern Europe This module introduces you to southeastern Europe and the OSCE’s work in: • Croatia (The OSCE Office in Zagreb was closed in 2012) • Macedonia • Bosnia-Herzegovina • Serbia • Kosovo • Montenegro • Albania . 1 Table of Contents Overview. 3 Geography. 4 People. 6 Former Yugoslavia. 10 World War I. 11 World War II. 12 Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia. 14 Post-Tito. 15 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. 17 Croatia. 18 Key information. 19 Historical background. 20 During Tito. 21 After Tito. 22 War of independence. 23 Domestic politics. 25 Macedonia. 35 Key information. 36 Historical background. 38 19th and early 20th centuries. 39 During Tito. 41 Independence. 43 Domestic politics. 44 Prospects and challenges. 67 Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH). 72 Key information. 73 Historical background. 75 During the Tito era. 76 The Bosnian war: 1992-1995. 79 Disunity of international community. 81 The Dayton Peace Accords, 1995. 84 Politics since Dayton. 87 Challenges and pressures. 95 Serbia. 99 Key information. 100 Introduction. 101 Contemporary Serbia. 102 Miloševi?'s rise. 104 Domestic resistance and state oppression. 106 Consequences of Kosovo. 109 The short-lived Kosovo Verification Mission. 110 MODULE 5. Southeastern Europe 2 Regime repression intensifies. 112 Struggle for Serbia’s political direction. 115 Nikolic wins 2012 presidential election. 122 Serbia's identity and its vision for the future. 124 Montenegro. 131 Key information. 132 Contemporary Montenegro. 133 Politics in Montenegro. 134 Other issues. 140 Kosovo. 142 Key information. 143 Historical background of Kosovo. 144 Organized non-violence. 145 After Dayton. 147 UNMIK established.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 SERBIA PUBLIC OPINION STUDY Respondent Booklet A
    2012 SERBIA PUBLIC OPINION STUDY Respondent Booklet A Page 1 • Boris Tadić Choice for a Better Life • Tomislav Nikolić Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) • Ivica Dačić SPS, PUPS, JS • Vojislav Koštunica Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) • Zoran Stanković United Regions of Serbia (URS) • Čedomir Jovanović LDP, SPO, SDU... • Jadranka Šešelj Serbian Radical Party (SRS) • Vladan Glišić "Dveri" • Istvan Pasztor SVM • Zoran Dragišić Pokret radnika i seljaka • Muamer Zukorlić Citizen's group • Danica Grujičić Social Democratic Alliance Page 2 • Choice for a Better Life - Boris Tadić • Let’s Get Serbia Moving - Tomislav Nikolić • Ivica Dačić - Socialist Party of Serbia - PUPS-US • Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) - Vojislav Koštunica • Turnover - Čedomir Jovanović • United Regions of Serbia - Mlađan Dinkić • Serbian Radical Party - Vojislav Šešelj • Dveri for the Life of Serbia • Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians - István Pásztor • Movement of Workers and Peasants • Communist party - Josip Broz • Party of Democratic Action of Sanjak - Sulejman Ugljani • All Together - BDU, CAH, DUC, DFVH, Slovak - Emir Elfić • "None of the offered answers" • Social Democratic alliance - Nebojša Leković • Albanians Coalition from Preševo Valley (KAPD) • Reformist party - Milan Višnjić • Montenegrin party - Nenad Stevović Page 3 • For a European Serbia - Boris Tadić • Serbian Radical Party - Vojislav Šešelj • Democratic Party of Serbia - New Serbia - Vojislav Koštunica • Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) - PUPS - US • Liberal Democratic Party - Čedomir Jovanović • Hungarian
    [Show full text]
  • The World Factbook Europe :: Serbia Introduction :: Serbia Background
    The World Factbook Europe :: Serbia Introduction :: Serbia Background: The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was formed in 1918; its name was changed to Yugoslavia in 1929. Various paramilitary bands resisted Nazi Germany's occupation and division of Yugoslavia from 1941 to 1945, but fought each other and ethnic opponents as much as the invaders. The military and political movement headed by Josip "TITO" Broz (Partisans) took full control of Yugoslavia when German and Croatian separatist forces were defeated in 1945. Although communist, TITO's new government and his successors (he died in 1980) managed to steer their own path between the Warsaw Pact nations and the West for the next four and a half decades. In 1989, Slobodan MILOSEVIC became president of the Republic of Serbia and his ultranationalist calls for Serbian domination led to the violent breakup of Yugoslavia along ethnic lines. In 1991, Croatia, Slovenia, and Macedonia declared independence, followed by Bosnia in 1992. The remaining republics of Serbia and Montenegro declared a new Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) in April 1992 and under MILOSEVIC's leadership, Serbia led various military campaigns to unite ethnic Serbs in neighboring republics into a "Greater Serbia." These actions were ultimately unsuccessful and led to the signing of the Dayton Peace Accords in 1995. MILOSEVIC retained control over Serbia and eventually became president of the FRY in 1997. In 1998, an ethnic Albanian insurgency in the formerly autonomous Serbian province of Kosovo provoked a Serbian counterinsurgency campaign that resulted in massacres and massive expulsions of ethnic Albanians living in Kosovo. The MILOSEVIC government's rejection of a proposed international settlement led to NATO's bombing of Serbia in the spring of 1999, to the withdrawal of Serbian military and police forces from Kosovo in June 1999, and to the stationing of a NATO-led force in Kosovo to provide a safe and secure environment for the region's ethnic communities.
    [Show full text]